The state government faced a visible reversal when the High Court reversed its pro Muslim reservation. The government may seek solace from the observations of the High Court which faulted the Backward Classes Commission more than it faulted the government. The fact remains that it seriously tested the three time aborted attempt to get Muslims – a huge local vote-bank into the luxury of constitutional backwardness. It was the YSR government that hit upon the original idea of carving out for the Muslims in the state a special position of backwardness. A paradox stares in the face. On the one hand, claim is made to the factum that India’s secular credentials are unquestionable. How then in 60 years did the community carve out for itself certain backward communities?
Even the politics of reservation has unfortunately taken the driver’s seat in operative politics. Even before the details of the seven judge bench judgement was known, protestors took to the street and politicians got into the act of issuing statements. Nothing surprising. This trend returns with nauseating regularity in Indian politics.
A quick peep at the journey this far would reveal that the YSR government in 2004 came up with its first ambitious. If ill-fated step of providing reservations to the entire Muslim community on the ground that they constituted a Backward Class ‘en bloc’. A bench of the High Court with a strength of 5 set aside the government action. It however made clear that the government had the power to provide reservations for Muslims provided the entire community was identified as Backward.
The government obviously lost sight – bonafide or otherwise to the fact that the Supreme Court had earlier in the famous Mandal case ruled that such recommendation for inclusion or exclusion must necessarily stem from a specially constituted statutory body. Also the High Court in 2004 ruled that the material before the government in coming to the conclusion of the community being backward was unscientific and unreliable.
The Backward Class Commission was reconstituted after the non performing Puttaswamy regime was over. Justice Dalwa Subramanyam of the High Court was called in to head the Commission. He and the other committee members went through the motions of an enquiry of identifying the Backward Class and recommended their inclusion.
The theatrics of enquiry, recommendation, acceptance failed judicial scrutiny. A five judge bench yet again quashed the action of the state government. Among other things the court visited and interpreted for the government the requirements as spelt out by the Supreme Court in the Mandal case. The said issue is pending final adjudication in the Apex Court.
With the race at the herstings hotting up and vote-banks garnering muscle, the government was perhaps pushed by political necessity into its hat-trick of hasty action. Yet again, a reference was made to the Backward Class Commission to tailor recommendations in line with the requirement of law. The enthusiastic Backward Class Commission faulted again. This time the government ensured that the quota slice was within the permissible limits. The government toned down the beneficial act from 5% to 4%. The fate of the agenda, however, was the same. On 8 February, a 7 judge bench with a 5-2 majority yet again faulted the Backward Class Commission. The action was described as ‘mechanical and perfunctory’. The bench headed by Chief Justice A R Dave, faulted the methodology of the Backward Class Commission. A survey should have been conducted by the Commission either by collecting data with regard to the entire population or by adopting a scientific sampling method, Justice Dave said. It was deplorable that the Commission was not even aware of the total population of the various groups of Muslims who have been included in the Group E for the purpose of reservations, he observed.
The consistency of official error is appalling. To the uninformed it may appear as if the judiciary is insensitive to the social issue of large scale backwardness in the Muslim community. If there be such an opinion, nothing can be farther from the truth. Time and again the court has upheld executive power and faulted the methodology. After two rounds of hard fought litigation, it is clear that the original judicial intent of having to create a Commission has come a cropper. The original intent was to create a body insulated from political motive and strengthened with expertise. The Commission appears insensitive to its calling. The government has been caught more than once with its pants down. Not a pleasant experience. In a separate development, the very constitution of the Dalwa Subramanyam Commission has been called in question. K Kondal Rao, Convenor of AP BC Mitrulu in a petition before the court complains neither the Chairman nor its members Ch. Panduranga, Challa Raghuram and N Bangara Raju have the required wherewithal to reside in the Commission
Two issues stare out: one the efficiency of the Commission and two the bonafides in the intended proactive stance of the government. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it. This government feels committed to history!
The dust and din will take some time to clear. Another round of litigation is in the offing. The scene shifts from Hyderabad to Delhi leaving behind an aching question as to whether the deserving tool are suffering because of the non constitutional enthusiasm exhibited by the powers that be. The dogged refusal to learn the principles set out by the judicial wing will haunt the executive. Bad physics is bound to derail motion. The resultant inertia in the social dynamics of the community is the first casualty. If the government does not get its act together, there may be other casualties. The problem cursed Rosaiah administration will do well to place proper strategy over poor politics.
L. Ravichander.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Dulha Mil Gaya Review
Cast: Fardeen Khan, Ishita Sharma, Sushmita Sen, Johny Lever, Vivek Vaswani, Suchitra Pillai, Mohit Chadda and Shah Rukh Khan.
Director: Mudassar Aziz.
The story is archaic, the treatment mediocre, the theme retrograde and the wit dim. What redeeming feature, does, the film have? Search and if you are a Sushmita Sen fan, then take courage and you could sit through the film.
Imagine a film of this Punjabi lass Samarpreet (Ishita Sharma) journeying to Trinidad and staying back to win her wayward hubby Donsai (Fardeen). Donsai in the first place is a rich play boy who simply does not believe in the institution of matrimony and girls dote on him. Papa leaves a will and plays spoil sport by conditioning the inheritance of over five billion dollars to a marriage with the Punjabi kudi.
Donsai – or Tej Dhanraj thus comes to Punjab, weds and leaves behind Samarpreet. A few months’ later Samarpreet lands up in Trinidad where Donsai is having fun and runs into top notch model Shimmer (Sushmita Sen). Shimmer now plays Prof Higgins and does a repeat of what Shammi Kapoor did to Rajshiri in Brahmachari in the 60s.
To complete the picture, you have Jasmine (Suchitra Pillai) and Lotus (Howard Rosemeyer) who are at Shimmer’s house filling space. There is local VJ Jigar (Mohit Chadda) who is called in to play twelfth man in a love story. Shimmer too, places career over love and keeps Richie Rich Pawan Raj Gandhi (Shah Rukh Khan) waiting in the wings. With this kind of a story line you simply don’t care what is happening or is to. Dull to a vice and with jokes that only feather can tickle, the movie is imminently avoidable.
Whatz wrong with the Sush – Khan Magic of Main Hoon Naa. Simply missing Fardeen (flabby) is woefully out of touch and looks faded and plump. For some inexplicable reason he has a frown fixed constantly on his face. Debutant Ishita is alright and if she gets another film, it will probably be opportunity to asses. Not now. Sushmita Sen is the only person who may receive some grudging compliments. Her serene presence is awesome. One wonders what strategy this ‘prima-diva’ of our cinema follows to choose a film. Certainly not script, not director nor co-stars. A shocking filmography of bad films, it’s her sheer class that has got her this far. She would do well to re-examine her premise.
This film is a yawn and is a surprising release in a festival season. Concentrate on the festival.
L. Ravichander
Director: Mudassar Aziz.
The story is archaic, the treatment mediocre, the theme retrograde and the wit dim. What redeeming feature, does, the film have? Search and if you are a Sushmita Sen fan, then take courage and you could sit through the film.
Imagine a film of this Punjabi lass Samarpreet (Ishita Sharma) journeying to Trinidad and staying back to win her wayward hubby Donsai (Fardeen). Donsai in the first place is a rich play boy who simply does not believe in the institution of matrimony and girls dote on him. Papa leaves a will and plays spoil sport by conditioning the inheritance of over five billion dollars to a marriage with the Punjabi kudi.
Donsai – or Tej Dhanraj thus comes to Punjab, weds and leaves behind Samarpreet. A few months’ later Samarpreet lands up in Trinidad where Donsai is having fun and runs into top notch model Shimmer (Sushmita Sen). Shimmer now plays Prof Higgins and does a repeat of what Shammi Kapoor did to Rajshiri in Brahmachari in the 60s.
To complete the picture, you have Jasmine (Suchitra Pillai) and Lotus (Howard Rosemeyer) who are at Shimmer’s house filling space. There is local VJ Jigar (Mohit Chadda) who is called in to play twelfth man in a love story. Shimmer too, places career over love and keeps Richie Rich Pawan Raj Gandhi (Shah Rukh Khan) waiting in the wings. With this kind of a story line you simply don’t care what is happening or is to. Dull to a vice and with jokes that only feather can tickle, the movie is imminently avoidable.
Whatz wrong with the Sush – Khan Magic of Main Hoon Naa. Simply missing Fardeen (flabby) is woefully out of touch and looks faded and plump. For some inexplicable reason he has a frown fixed constantly on his face. Debutant Ishita is alright and if she gets another film, it will probably be opportunity to asses. Not now. Sushmita Sen is the only person who may receive some grudging compliments. Her serene presence is awesome. One wonders what strategy this ‘prima-diva’ of our cinema follows to choose a film. Certainly not script, not director nor co-stars. A shocking filmography of bad films, it’s her sheer class that has got her this far. She would do well to re-examine her premise.
This film is a yawn and is a surprising release in a festival season. Concentrate on the festival.
L. Ravichander
Chance Pe Dance
Cast: Shahid Kapoor, Genelia Dsouza, Parikshit Sahani, Vikas Bhalla.
Director: Ken Gosh.
Producer: Ronnie Screwvala.
The problem is that while tragedy is an epic, success is a short story. Ken Gosh therefore spends reels and reels telling the tale of rejection, but quickly produces the success of protagonist Sameer (Shahid Kapoor) as he signs well choreographed Chance Pe Dance. The film’s screenplay (Ken alongside Nupur Asthana and Manishi Chada) is so lacking in punch that it saps the film of all energy despite having dance as its fulcrum.
There is a dirty world out there. It can snatch the dreams out of your life. It can force you into a cubby hole and force you to call it home. It can deprive you of your passion and force you into a profession where you have no energy. It can be bitchy and cruel, because the world owns a new instrument – successometer and your readings are not just doctored but embarrassing.
Chance Pe Dance is about the struggles of Sameer, the support from his lady love Tina (Genelia); the cheating of his friend (Vikas Bhalla); the challenge from his single parent (Parikshit Sahani); the chemistry with a set of school kids and finally his tryst with success.
The problem with the film is with both – content and treatment. Archaic and drifting, it lacks energy and drive.
Despite this, the film passes muster thanks largely due to Shahid Kapoor. Genelia gives him company but has very little opportunity in the script. The script is completely dedicated to the dancing skills of Shahid Kapoor. He rips off his shirt to get the oohs and aahs. Wonderful dancer that he is, he makes good use of the opportunity. The film (coming as it does, even as the young actor is basking in the aftermath of the recognition for Kaminey) reiterates that this young actor is extremely talented. He is believed to have struggled to get to his present position – making the film a near ‘bio-pic’. With Ranbhir, he is heading fast to the top slots which anyway has arguably been vacated by most Khans.
The movie is a case of lost opportunities – except for Shahid. For his fans it is a must see. For the rest it is don’t see.
Sameer somewhere in the script goes on to state that the traveller has no choice but to keep walking. I guess the viewer too has no choice. Yet he adds, that sometimes it is darker outside the theatre than within. This time round it is certainly more tiring within.
L. Ravichander.
Director: Ken Gosh.
Producer: Ronnie Screwvala.
The problem is that while tragedy is an epic, success is a short story. Ken Gosh therefore spends reels and reels telling the tale of rejection, but quickly produces the success of protagonist Sameer (Shahid Kapoor) as he signs well choreographed Chance Pe Dance. The film’s screenplay (Ken alongside Nupur Asthana and Manishi Chada) is so lacking in punch that it saps the film of all energy despite having dance as its fulcrum.
There is a dirty world out there. It can snatch the dreams out of your life. It can force you into a cubby hole and force you to call it home. It can deprive you of your passion and force you into a profession where you have no energy. It can be bitchy and cruel, because the world owns a new instrument – successometer and your readings are not just doctored but embarrassing.
Chance Pe Dance is about the struggles of Sameer, the support from his lady love Tina (Genelia); the cheating of his friend (Vikas Bhalla); the challenge from his single parent (Parikshit Sahani); the chemistry with a set of school kids and finally his tryst with success.
The problem with the film is with both – content and treatment. Archaic and drifting, it lacks energy and drive.
Despite this, the film passes muster thanks largely due to Shahid Kapoor. Genelia gives him company but has very little opportunity in the script. The script is completely dedicated to the dancing skills of Shahid Kapoor. He rips off his shirt to get the oohs and aahs. Wonderful dancer that he is, he makes good use of the opportunity. The film (coming as it does, even as the young actor is basking in the aftermath of the recognition for Kaminey) reiterates that this young actor is extremely talented. He is believed to have struggled to get to his present position – making the film a near ‘bio-pic’. With Ranbhir, he is heading fast to the top slots which anyway has arguably been vacated by most Khans.
The movie is a case of lost opportunities – except for Shahid. For his fans it is a must see. For the rest it is don’t see.
Sameer somewhere in the script goes on to state that the traveller has no choice but to keep walking. I guess the viewer too has no choice. Yet he adds, that sometimes it is darker outside the theatre than within. This time round it is certainly more tiring within.
L. Ravichander.
Ishqiya
Producer: Vishal Bhardwaj Raman Maroo
Director: Abhishek Chaubhey
Star Cast: Naseruddin Shah, Arshad Warsi, Vidya Balan, Salman Shahid, Rajesh Sharma
Cinematography: Mohana Krishna
Action: Jai Singh
Editor: Namrata Rao
Screenplay: Vishal Bhardwaj, Sabrina Dhawan, Abhishek Chaubhey.
Welcome Abhishek Chaubhey!! Ishqiya is time indication that Bollywood is coming of age. Not just in the treatment of its treatment of its films but also in the choice of its plots. Sociologically speaking, we live in times of “liberal morals”. Our morality is less accountable and we people are even less inhibited. This is bound to reflect in the art and literature of our times. Ishqiya is thus an unpretentious look at the happenings involving three persons who, are not very concerned about the seeming values of society.
Krishna (Vidya Balan) is the widow of a local goon. During his lifetime – she is willing to play seductress to the hilt. After his death she plays host to two guys, Khalujan (Naseruddin Shah) and Babban (Arshad Warsi), who are on the run. They owe huge sums to yet another goon Mushtaq (Salman Shahid) and would have to pay with their lives, if pay they cannot.
Why she is willing to play host is a part of the intrigue that unfolds in a style that is a reminder of Vishal Bharadwaj’s approach. You soon know that she is playing the Sholay Thakur to the Jai-Veeru and she has a personal agenda. She uses the financial need of the twosome, she uses her charm, her sex-appeal-any and everything she has to achieve her goal. What goal? Watch the film. To state anything further would be telling. Not fair.
The film has the rawness of a Vishal Bharadwaj and the ruthlessness of a Govind Nihlani. The screenplay (Vishal Bhardwaj, Sabrina Dhawan and Abhishek Chaubhey) is crafted and leads you through the dusty Gorakhpur in U.P. in a way reminiscent of Omkara. In fact even Arshad Warsi reminds you of Saif.
The film stands out for an unapologetic look at life. It is not sub aerial. It is also told interestingly with turns and twists that are intended to keep the viewer engaged.
Watch the film for the magic of Gulzar and Vishal Bhardwaj as the music director. If Ibna batoota is catchy, the classical number soothes.
Naseer is polished. Vidya is sincere and sensous. She is however not made for the role. Someone with less finesse. Yet, she is on roll and the performance truly showcases her skills as an actress. Arshad Warsi is just too much talent, lost in the wilderness. This time, out of the Circuit-mould, he is punched filled and makes compulsive viewing.
In the final analysis, the film may sometimes hurt your sensitivity but never your sensibility. It may not be everybody’s diet, but it is a clear announcement of the arrival of new talent Abhishek Chaubhey. The only failing, if any, in the debutant, is his commitment in style to his master Vishal Bhardwaj.
Yet another wonderful aspect of the film is the brilliant cinematography Mohana Krishna. A dusty Indian town has never before made a statement of its own and so strongly aided the telling of a tale.
To the discernable, the film is not just a happy experience, but one filled with hope.
L. Ravichander
Director: Abhishek Chaubhey
Star Cast: Naseruddin Shah, Arshad Warsi, Vidya Balan, Salman Shahid, Rajesh Sharma
Cinematography: Mohana Krishna
Action: Jai Singh
Editor: Namrata Rao
Screenplay: Vishal Bhardwaj, Sabrina Dhawan, Abhishek Chaubhey.
Welcome Abhishek Chaubhey!! Ishqiya is time indication that Bollywood is coming of age. Not just in the treatment of its treatment of its films but also in the choice of its plots. Sociologically speaking, we live in times of “liberal morals”. Our morality is less accountable and we people are even less inhibited. This is bound to reflect in the art and literature of our times. Ishqiya is thus an unpretentious look at the happenings involving three persons who, are not very concerned about the seeming values of society.
Krishna (Vidya Balan) is the widow of a local goon. During his lifetime – she is willing to play seductress to the hilt. After his death she plays host to two guys, Khalujan (Naseruddin Shah) and Babban (Arshad Warsi), who are on the run. They owe huge sums to yet another goon Mushtaq (Salman Shahid) and would have to pay with their lives, if pay they cannot.
Why she is willing to play host is a part of the intrigue that unfolds in a style that is a reminder of Vishal Bharadwaj’s approach. You soon know that she is playing the Sholay Thakur to the Jai-Veeru and she has a personal agenda. She uses the financial need of the twosome, she uses her charm, her sex-appeal-any and everything she has to achieve her goal. What goal? Watch the film. To state anything further would be telling. Not fair.
The film has the rawness of a Vishal Bharadwaj and the ruthlessness of a Govind Nihlani. The screenplay (Vishal Bhardwaj, Sabrina Dhawan and Abhishek Chaubhey) is crafted and leads you through the dusty Gorakhpur in U.P. in a way reminiscent of Omkara. In fact even Arshad Warsi reminds you of Saif.
The film stands out for an unapologetic look at life. It is not sub aerial. It is also told interestingly with turns and twists that are intended to keep the viewer engaged.
Watch the film for the magic of Gulzar and Vishal Bhardwaj as the music director. If Ibna batoota is catchy, the classical number soothes.
Naseer is polished. Vidya is sincere and sensous. She is however not made for the role. Someone with less finesse. Yet, she is on roll and the performance truly showcases her skills as an actress. Arshad Warsi is just too much talent, lost in the wilderness. This time, out of the Circuit-mould, he is punched filled and makes compulsive viewing.
In the final analysis, the film may sometimes hurt your sensitivity but never your sensibility. It may not be everybody’s diet, but it is a clear announcement of the arrival of new talent Abhishek Chaubhey. The only failing, if any, in the debutant, is his commitment in style to his master Vishal Bhardwaj.
Yet another wonderful aspect of the film is the brilliant cinematography Mohana Krishna. A dusty Indian town has never before made a statement of its own and so strongly aided the telling of a tale.
To the discernable, the film is not just a happy experience, but one filled with hope.
L. Ravichander
Striker Review
Cast: Siddharth, Nicolette Bird, Padmapriya, Anupam Kher, Aditya Pancholi, Seema Biswas, Vidya Malvade, Ankur Vikal and Anoop Soni.
Director cum Producer: Chandan Arora.
Cinematographer: P.S. Vinod.
Editor: Sajit Unnikrishnan.
Dostoevsky wrote a heart touching work – The Gambler – touching the social fabric of Russia and Paris in the times. Akin and nearly in the same verve is Chandan Arora’s Striker. This is serious stuff. Make no mistake. It is designed to reach out, as it does to a niche audience. The script is not as tight as one would want and like it to be. But like Bharadwaj’s Kameiney, the underbelly gets a deglamourised and close look especially through the lens of P.S. Vinod.
The most important factor about the film however is the endearing performance of its main actor Siddharth. As the protagonist who is not only pushed by circumstances to make money by betting his skills with the carom-board but also to take on the local goon – Jaleel (Aditya Pancholi). He stands out and delivers wonderful punch filled performance. Interesting the punch is more appealing than powerful. It may lack the style and glamour quotient of a Shahid Kapoor but it makes up with sincerity and understanding that heroes are not always a brawl function.
Early in life, Surya’s (Siddharth) family is pushed into a tenement in Malwani. Brother Chandrakanth (Anoop Soni), early in life, exhibits his striker’s skills on the board, picks a quarrel with Jaleel and ends up with muck on the family face. The family quickly recoils. The story moves on familiar lines on how Surya and friend Zaid (Ankur Vikal) are sucked into a world that has no time for excuses and a world that is constantly forking one to the hot-seat.
Dostoevsky says – In the first place, everything about it seemed to me so foul- so morally mean and foul. Yet I am not speaking of the hungry, the restless folk who, by scores nay, even by the hundreds- could be seen crowded around the gambling tables. For in a desire to win quickly and to win much I can see nothing sordid; I have always applauded the opinion of a certain dead and gone, but cocksure, moralist, who replied to the excuse that “one may gamble moderately”, by saying “that to do so makes things worse since in that case the profits too will always be moderate.”
In a film of this kind, the story is unimportant. Perhaps intentionally even the treatment isn’t. It is the statement. It is also the maker of the statement. Here lies the richness of the film. Many aspects of the film are faulty including the romantic angle as also the relationship between the brother and sister which constitutes the partial base of the screenplay. Performances, specially from Seema Biswas, Vidya Malvade, Ankur Vikal and Anoop Soni is appealing.
The film is however designed to revolve around the performing skills of Siddharth. The actor who hitherto has not had a serious dekho from Bollywood gets a gift-wrapped opportunity. He delivers with panache. The film, if for nothing is watchable for Siddharth. In a nouveau grammatical Bollywood, Striker is a step forward. It articulates and surely through Siddharth an alternate paradigm. The film falters, the actor does not. Seen even from the precincts of the faltering film maker, its worth encouraging in the context of experiment. This is a Striker that lacks velocity but like in the game, sometimes, a deft touch is more important. Siddharth stands out as the red coin on the board. More value and wonderful delivery.
Director cum Producer: Chandan Arora.
Cinematographer: P.S. Vinod.
Editor: Sajit Unnikrishnan.
Dostoevsky wrote a heart touching work – The Gambler – touching the social fabric of Russia and Paris in the times. Akin and nearly in the same verve is Chandan Arora’s Striker. This is serious stuff. Make no mistake. It is designed to reach out, as it does to a niche audience. The script is not as tight as one would want and like it to be. But like Bharadwaj’s Kameiney, the underbelly gets a deglamourised and close look especially through the lens of P.S. Vinod.
The most important factor about the film however is the endearing performance of its main actor Siddharth. As the protagonist who is not only pushed by circumstances to make money by betting his skills with the carom-board but also to take on the local goon – Jaleel (Aditya Pancholi). He stands out and delivers wonderful punch filled performance. Interesting the punch is more appealing than powerful. It may lack the style and glamour quotient of a Shahid Kapoor but it makes up with sincerity and understanding that heroes are not always a brawl function.
Early in life, Surya’s (Siddharth) family is pushed into a tenement in Malwani. Brother Chandrakanth (Anoop Soni), early in life, exhibits his striker’s skills on the board, picks a quarrel with Jaleel and ends up with muck on the family face. The family quickly recoils. The story moves on familiar lines on how Surya and friend Zaid (Ankur Vikal) are sucked into a world that has no time for excuses and a world that is constantly forking one to the hot-seat.
Dostoevsky says – In the first place, everything about it seemed to me so foul- so morally mean and foul. Yet I am not speaking of the hungry, the restless folk who, by scores nay, even by the hundreds- could be seen crowded around the gambling tables. For in a desire to win quickly and to win much I can see nothing sordid; I have always applauded the opinion of a certain dead and gone, but cocksure, moralist, who replied to the excuse that “one may gamble moderately”, by saying “that to do so makes things worse since in that case the profits too will always be moderate.”
In a film of this kind, the story is unimportant. Perhaps intentionally even the treatment isn’t. It is the statement. It is also the maker of the statement. Here lies the richness of the film. Many aspects of the film are faulty including the romantic angle as also the relationship between the brother and sister which constitutes the partial base of the screenplay. Performances, specially from Seema Biswas, Vidya Malvade, Ankur Vikal and Anoop Soni is appealing.
The film is however designed to revolve around the performing skills of Siddharth. The actor who hitherto has not had a serious dekho from Bollywood gets a gift-wrapped opportunity. He delivers with panache. The film, if for nothing is watchable for Siddharth. In a nouveau grammatical Bollywood, Striker is a step forward. It articulates and surely through Siddharth an alternate paradigm. The film falters, the actor does not. Seen even from the precincts of the faltering film maker, its worth encouraging in the context of experiment. This is a Striker that lacks velocity but like in the game, sometimes, a deft touch is more important. Siddharth stands out as the red coin on the board. More value and wonderful delivery.
Rann review
Producer: Sheetal Vinod Talwar, Madhu Mantena.
Director: Ram Gopal Varma.
Star Cast: Amitabh Bachchan, Ritesh Deshmukh, Paresh Rawal, Mohnish Behl, Suchitra Krishnamurthy, Rajat Kapoor, Gul Panag, Neetu Chandra,
Rajpal Yadav, Sudeep, Rahul Pendkalkar, Neena Kulkarni, Simone Singh, Iklaq Khan, Alok Nath.
Cinematography: Amit Roy
Art: Aparna Sud
Editor: Nipun Gupta
RGV does a vivisection of the electronic media and does it with a high degree of focus. True to his style, it is a “take it or leave it” statement. The signature angst is there but paradoxically it is over-simplified and consequently lacking credibility.
Media barons are at war. The clash of the black and white: there is Vijay Harshvardhan Malik (Amitabh Bachchan) who is principled and unwilling to use his channel to gain TRPs and thereby revenue and there is Amrish Kakkar (Mohnish Behl) who is willing to do anything to lead the rat race. The Director (or the script) would have us believe that is the clash between the contemporary and the Dinosaur, the practical and the ideal. Harshvardhan’s son Jay (Sudeep) is a trifle vexed with pappa’s approach and is simmering with anger and disappointment. He is wild at new entrant Purab (Ritesh) who is in awe of Harsh. There is also a mole in Nalini Kashyap (Suchitra Krishnamurthy).
Things come to a boil when Jay joins hands with the scheming politician Mohan Pandey (Paresh Rawal) and ambitious businessman Naveen (Rajat Kapoor). The later is Jay’s brother-in-law, married to his sister Priya (Simone Singh). The unholy nexus between politics, business and the media is knit tightly into the racy script to a finale that leaves it more to Bachchan than the script to deliver.
The film comes in a way as a relief from a film maker whose “Aag…” is remembered as much as his Shiva or Sarkar. Thankfully he is in form. He also does not use too much of his “violence” to tell the tale, though surely the script offers enough temptation. More than the script, the high moralist view, the contemporarineity, it is the cast that delivers. From the likes of Gul Panag and Rajat Kapoor who are restricted for space to Suchitra Krishnamurthy and Simone Singh who are just placed into the showcase everyone offers a moment to the film. Paresh Rawal’s character is too straight jacket and the veteran sleep walks the interpretation.
As ever, Amitabh Bachchan grows in his role. Just when you are about to write him off, he delivers the punch. Watch his dramatic evolution in the climax. It offers an artistic explanation of how Big B approaches a script and is capable of having his winning moments. The surprise packet is Sudeep who is somewhere an extension of Sarkar’s K K. No – he is no-where near K K but he energises Rann and renders a heart touching, realistic performance. Watch out for him unless he is typecast. Rann is not a must see. It is a worth watch.
L. Ravichander.
Director: Ram Gopal Varma.
Star Cast: Amitabh Bachchan, Ritesh Deshmukh, Paresh Rawal, Mohnish Behl, Suchitra Krishnamurthy, Rajat Kapoor, Gul Panag, Neetu Chandra,
Rajpal Yadav, Sudeep, Rahul Pendkalkar, Neena Kulkarni, Simone Singh, Iklaq Khan, Alok Nath.
Cinematography: Amit Roy
Art: Aparna Sud
Editor: Nipun Gupta
RGV does a vivisection of the electronic media and does it with a high degree of focus. True to his style, it is a “take it or leave it” statement. The signature angst is there but paradoxically it is over-simplified and consequently lacking credibility.
Media barons are at war. The clash of the black and white: there is Vijay Harshvardhan Malik (Amitabh Bachchan) who is principled and unwilling to use his channel to gain TRPs and thereby revenue and there is Amrish Kakkar (Mohnish Behl) who is willing to do anything to lead the rat race. The Director (or the script) would have us believe that is the clash between the contemporary and the Dinosaur, the practical and the ideal. Harshvardhan’s son Jay (Sudeep) is a trifle vexed with pappa’s approach and is simmering with anger and disappointment. He is wild at new entrant Purab (Ritesh) who is in awe of Harsh. There is also a mole in Nalini Kashyap (Suchitra Krishnamurthy).
Things come to a boil when Jay joins hands with the scheming politician Mohan Pandey (Paresh Rawal) and ambitious businessman Naveen (Rajat Kapoor). The later is Jay’s brother-in-law, married to his sister Priya (Simone Singh). The unholy nexus between politics, business and the media is knit tightly into the racy script to a finale that leaves it more to Bachchan than the script to deliver.
The film comes in a way as a relief from a film maker whose “Aag…” is remembered as much as his Shiva or Sarkar. Thankfully he is in form. He also does not use too much of his “violence” to tell the tale, though surely the script offers enough temptation. More than the script, the high moralist view, the contemporarineity, it is the cast that delivers. From the likes of Gul Panag and Rajat Kapoor who are restricted for space to Suchitra Krishnamurthy and Simone Singh who are just placed into the showcase everyone offers a moment to the film. Paresh Rawal’s character is too straight jacket and the veteran sleep walks the interpretation.
As ever, Amitabh Bachchan grows in his role. Just when you are about to write him off, he delivers the punch. Watch his dramatic evolution in the climax. It offers an artistic explanation of how Big B approaches a script and is capable of having his winning moments. The surprise packet is Sudeep who is somewhere an extension of Sarkar’s K K. No – he is no-where near K K but he energises Rann and renders a heart touching, realistic performance. Watch out for him unless he is typecast. Rann is not a must see. It is a worth watch.
L. Ravichander.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Raat Gayi is interesting
Man is perhaps growing tired of one of the oldest institutions he has inherited: Marriage. Urban life has drastically revisited its moral premise and is perhaps undergoing an adjustment phase. It is going through a zone of chaos. Society does not visit its institutions in parts. The resultant tumult is based on the effect of the revisit and not so much the spot of such re examination.
The knowledge wave and the power shift towards real economics has perhaps in a paradoxical fashion echoed the Marxian belief of economics being at the root of it all and since the super structure has changed drastically ( based on some perceptions of economics) the roots too should have. The aerial vision however clearly indicates the same.
Seen in the context of our cinema , this and more is reflected in Saurav Shukla’s Raat Gayi Baat Gayi. Even seen from a non societal perspective and from the limited vision of cinema as an entertainment function the film is a clear indication of the maturing of our cinema. Obviously our film makers are now willing to walk on roads less travelled , even not cash entrapping and addressing a specific audience.
The script skilfully designed reflects the simmering tribulations in nouveau world of the haves, the fashionables and the intellectuals. There is somewhere there a a disturbing zone . Issues varying from under achievement, satiate quotient, infidelity, suspect morality, lack of personal accountability- all these and more are manifested in the crowded emotions of three couples whose lives seem well ensconced till the simmering emotions begin to play tantrums with the quiet surface of life.
Rahul (Rajat Kapoor) has every thing going his way till he attends this party one night and runs into a compulsive teaser Sophia (Neha Dupia) and looses his balance. His wife Mitali (Iravate) is a sculptor who has a fine family but has a discernable aching for the company of a young man of her profession; Amit (Vinay Pathak) is happily married to Nandini (Anuradha Menon) but is addicted to porn sites and thus a marriage at stake; Saxena (Dalip Tahil) is a writer who has a solution to every challenge in the lives of others but can do little of his naïve (?) wife Jolly (Navneet Nishan). All meet at this party reminiscent of the Benegal film The Party and life is mirrored in its delicate nuances. In built frustrations and abnegated desires raise their voices and create a furore in the seeming peace.
All this is treated without much ado and with a tongue in cheek manner. None of the characters over reach and function within the realistic realms of their being. This makes the narrative very authentic and the viewer is forced to take it seriously. There is then the Saurav Shukla humour ( wry) which helps you chuckle instead of laugh. It is not often that our film makers make you have a smile on your face, Invariably you are laughing at rather than laughing for. This is a welcome change.
All the actors put in their best and deliver the kind of performances that in another context would have been viewed as “bits and pieces” performers. Thy collectively and individually deliver and that is what matters in a team game called cinema.
Raat Gayi Baat Gayi is at one level about a case of mild amnesia- real and more importantly moral and emotional. Nice movie. Asks questions. Worth watching, it may set us thinking!!
L.Ravichander
The knowledge wave and the power shift towards real economics has perhaps in a paradoxical fashion echoed the Marxian belief of economics being at the root of it all and since the super structure has changed drastically ( based on some perceptions of economics) the roots too should have. The aerial vision however clearly indicates the same.
Seen in the context of our cinema , this and more is reflected in Saurav Shukla’s Raat Gayi Baat Gayi. Even seen from a non societal perspective and from the limited vision of cinema as an entertainment function the film is a clear indication of the maturing of our cinema. Obviously our film makers are now willing to walk on roads less travelled , even not cash entrapping and addressing a specific audience.
The script skilfully designed reflects the simmering tribulations in nouveau world of the haves, the fashionables and the intellectuals. There is somewhere there a a disturbing zone . Issues varying from under achievement, satiate quotient, infidelity, suspect morality, lack of personal accountability- all these and more are manifested in the crowded emotions of three couples whose lives seem well ensconced till the simmering emotions begin to play tantrums with the quiet surface of life.
Rahul (Rajat Kapoor) has every thing going his way till he attends this party one night and runs into a compulsive teaser Sophia (Neha Dupia) and looses his balance. His wife Mitali (Iravate) is a sculptor who has a fine family but has a discernable aching for the company of a young man of her profession; Amit (Vinay Pathak) is happily married to Nandini (Anuradha Menon) but is addicted to porn sites and thus a marriage at stake; Saxena (Dalip Tahil) is a writer who has a solution to every challenge in the lives of others but can do little of his naïve (?) wife Jolly (Navneet Nishan). All meet at this party reminiscent of the Benegal film The Party and life is mirrored in its delicate nuances. In built frustrations and abnegated desires raise their voices and create a furore in the seeming peace.
All this is treated without much ado and with a tongue in cheek manner. None of the characters over reach and function within the realistic realms of their being. This makes the narrative very authentic and the viewer is forced to take it seriously. There is then the Saurav Shukla humour ( wry) which helps you chuckle instead of laugh. It is not often that our film makers make you have a smile on your face, Invariably you are laughing at rather than laughing for. This is a welcome change.
All the actors put in their best and deliver the kind of performances that in another context would have been viewed as “bits and pieces” performers. Thy collectively and individually deliver and that is what matters in a team game called cinema.
Raat Gayi Baat Gayi is at one level about a case of mild amnesia- real and more importantly moral and emotional. Nice movie. Asks questions. Worth watching, it may set us thinking!!
L.Ravichander
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
